Congress Should Veto Obama’s War

“Congress doesn’t have a whole lot of core responsibilities,” said Barack Obama
last week in an astonishing remark.

For in the Constitution, Congress appears as the first branch of government.
And among its enumerated powers are the power to tax, coin money, create courts,
provide for the common defense, raise and support an army, maintain a navy and
declare war.

But, then, perhaps Obama’s contempt is justified.

For consider Congress’ broad assent to news that Obama has decided to attack
Syria, a nation that has not attacked us and against which Congress has never
authorized a war.

Why is Obama making plans to launch cruise missiles on Syria?

According to a “senior administration official … who insisted on anonymity,”
President Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons on his own people last week
in the two-year-old Syrian civil war.

But who deputized the United States to walk the streets of the world pistol-whipping
bad actors. Where does our imperial president come off drawing “red lines” and
ordering nations not to cross them?

Neither the Security Council nor Congress nor NATO nor the Arab League has
authorized war on Syria.

Who made Barack Obama the Wyatt Earp of the Global Village?

Moreover, where is the evidence that WMDs were used and that it had to be Assad
who ordered them? Such an attack makes no sense.

Firing a few shells of gas at Syrian civilians was not going to advance Assad’s
cause but, rather, was certain to bring universal condemnation on his regime
and deal cards to the War Party which wants a U.S. war on Syria as the back
door to war on Iran.

Why did the United States so swiftly dismiss Assad’s offer to have U.N. inspectors
– already in Damascus investigating old charges he or the rebels used poison
gas – go to the site of the latest incident?

Do we not want to know the truth?

Are we fearful the facts may turn out, as did the facts on the ground in Iraq,
to contradict our latest claims about WMDs? Are we afraid that it was rebel
elements or rogue Syrian soldiers who fired the gas shells to stampede us into
fighting this war?

With U.S. ships moving toward Syria’s coast and the McCainiacs assuring us
we can smash Syria from offshore without serious injury to ourselves, why has
Congress not come back to debate war?

Lest we forget, Ronald Reagan was sold the same bill of goods the War Party
is selling today – that we can intervene decisively in a Mideast civil war
at little or no cost to ourselves.

Reagan listened and ordered our Marines into the middle of Lebanon’s civil
war. And he was there when they brought home the 241 dead from the Beirut barracks
and our dead diplomats from the Beirut embassy.

The only thing we learn from history is that we do not learn from history.
Congress should cut short its five-week vacation, come back, debate and decide
by recorded vote whether Obama can take us into yet another Middle East war.

The questions to which Congress needs answers:

Do we have incontrovertible proof that Bashar Assad ordered chemical weapons
be used on his own people? And if he did not, who did?

What kind of reprisals might we expect if we launch cruise missiles at Syria,
which is allied with Hezbollah and Iran?

If we attack, and Syria or its allies attack U.S. military or diplomatic
missions in the Middle East or here in the United States, are we prepared
for the wider war we will have started?

Assuming Syria responds with a counterstrike, how far are we prepared to
go up the escalator to regional war? If we intervene, are we prepared for
the possible defeat of the side we have chosen, which would then be seen as
a strategic defeat for the United States?

If stung and bleeding from retaliation, are we prepared to go all the way,
boots on the ground, to bring down Assad? Are we prepared to occupy Syria
to prevent its falling to the Al-Nusra Front, which it may if Assad falls
and we do not intervene?

The basic question that needs to be asked about this horrific attack on civilians,
which appears to be gas related, is: Cui bono?

To whose benefit would the use of nerve gas on Syrian women and children redound?
Certainly not Assad’s, as we can see from the furor and threats against him
that the use of gas has produced.

The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in
rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have
us come in and fight their war.

Perhaps Congress cannot defund Obamacare. But at least they can come back to
Washington and tell Obama, sinking poll numbers aside, he has no authority to
drag us into another war. His Libyan adventure, which gave us the Benghazi massacre
and cover-up, was his last hurrah as war president.

Author: Patrick J. Buchanan

{According to a “senior administration official … who insisted on anonymity,” President Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons on his own people last week in the two-year-old Syrian civil war.}

The senior adm. official who insisted on anonymity is SUSAN RICE , THE BUCHER GIRL. SHE MUST BE BOMBED NOT SYRIA. Obama and his advisors are all war criminals. There is no UN and no ICC. Ban ki Moon is a WAR CRIMINAL MSUT BE ARRESTED. He parroting the words of the evil at the wh*re house. Destroy the evil and burn their houses down NOW.

a nice piece by pat. but he routinely skirts the issue of this as a false flag, and of course the long history of false flags by the usa. and these criminals in the federal gov't have no shame. the gall of their lies is monumental and appalling. and really, after iraq, afghanistan, and libya's "kinetic action" what credibility do they even have left? their crimes are as staggering as our complete lack of will to arrest and charge them all with treason.

john

A remake of shock and awe with John Kerry starring as Colin Powell

john mac

I agree, the gall of these people never fails to amaze me. More WMDs- Let's kick ass! The warmongers are getting a boner just thinking about it. Screw the American people, were just gonna do whatever we damn well want. Hell we got 9% of the country behind us! That should be good enough to whip them ayrabs.

carroll price

The gall shown by the US is the same gall shown by that shitty little stolen country in the Middle East. Which tells me that the same people run both countries.

Mikhail

Blood sacrificers. They shoot holes in Darwin's theory…….as they haven't denounced blood sacrifice yet. IN fact, Norway was it that passed a law outlawing blood (animal, although those Khazars like human instead) sacrifice. The self-chosen nearly rioted in the street. Can't do without their blood. Can't be chosen without their blood. They sacrifice the true Semites of the mideast………..and they sacrifice our American soldiers, too. Dual citizenship equals TRAITORS. Neanderthals. It's not racism. It's a species hatred from when we as Cro-Magnon nearly wiped them out, thus their hatred and blood lust toward humans. Look what their kin on Wall Street have done to us. The real estate bubble-bust scam, Treasury giving their criminal CEO kin bonuses on top of the trillion plus, sold worthless derivatives to our pension funds KNOWING THEY WERE WORTHLESS ALL ALONG, and their ownership of 90% of our political prostitutes in D.C. echo the Wall Street tribe's perpetual war for corporate (tribal) profit machine………"More blood".

Mikhail

KILL MORE MUSLIMS. Raise Social Secuirity age to 95. KILL MORE MUSLIMS. Abolish Medicare & Medicaid. KILL MORE MUSLIMS. Raise taxes. KILL MORE MUSLIMS. Raise the debt ceiling. KILL MORE MUSLIMS. Stop all unemployment payments. KILL MORE MUSLIMS. Cease all road/bridge and water/sewer projects. KILL MORE MUSLIMS. Stop all road repair projects. KILL MORE MUSLIMS. Cut back funding on already underfunded public schools. KILL MORE MUSLIMS.

Mikhail

Dual citizenship ship equal TRAITORS. Dual citizenship equal blood sacrificing Neanderthals. Eliminate them from our Congress, White House, Supreme Court, Wall Street, and anywhere but their "Homeland"……so they can be loyal to the country they live in for a change. Bernanke, Lithuanian Khazar. Netanyahu, Lithuanian Khazar. Sharon (his predecessor) "The Butcher", Lithuanian Khazar. Too much a pattern and it goes on and on. Time to act. Time to teach them loyalty the American way. Or………stop paying taxes to an illegal government. NO taxes, NO government.

jrs

Really, you bring up the blood sacrifice stuff? Do people know the history of that slur? F off and die.

Mikhail

Gotta be a tribal member with that hatred and blood lust thing so obvious. And obviously that "intellect" thing is a myth.

outsider

Pat's first sentence, which I didn't know that our Dear Leader said, is really chilling. By stating that "Congress doesn't have a whole lot of core responsibilities" is not Obama in effect implying that he has dictatorial powers? Of course, Congress must come back to debate this issue before any military attack commences, but they won't. That way, when things go wrong, as they assuredly will, Congress can deny responsibility. For, if they took a vote, the GOP would probably vote for the war in even greater numbers that the Dems. The hypocrite Dems only are against some wars when not in power. The GOP, with very few exceptions, is for war all the time. Where is the statesman, Hagel or Gen. Dempsey come to mind, who has the courage to resign over this scam and speak out against it? Do they not remember that Colin Powell forever ruined his reputation by closing the deal on the Iraq aggression when he reiterated outrageous Bush lies before the UN?

The Chump

Didn't former defense chief Robert Gates say "anyone who wants the US to become engaged in another middle east conflict needs his head examined." Why isn't he on the TV news shows?

libori

The window to rob the American taxpayer in another war closes for the lobby. After the WMD scam worked so good to start the Iraq cakewalk, it seems even the flimsiest "evidence" cooked up has to do for this one. King Obama's handlers have been advised to get this going before asking the American people in October that they have run out of money.

Guest

Bit of hypocrisy here by P Buchanan. His idol/boss Reagan had an undeclared war in Grenada. Has he ever criticized that? Did he do so at the time?

Also heard him defending the NSA program on the McLaughlin show a month or 2 back.

outsider

Guest, Buchanan was admittedly a cold war warrior when the USSR existed. But I'll give him credit for the evolution of his position to where he is now calling US leaders liars. Remember he was fired from far left MSNBC for writing uncomfortable truths about US decline in "Suicide of a Superpower." Pat has consistently been against US ME aggression since Bush the elder's gulf war 1, although I'll agree that he was on the wrong side prior to that. I didn't know that he defended NSA spying on US citizens. If so, I am saddened to hear this. I don't always agree with Pat.

Guest

P Buchanan wanted all the Iran Contra players to be pardoned , as well.

Total Information Awareness was the product of some of those players. For those who are unaware, that was the ancestor of today's internet Surveillance programs

I will submit to you, if you study his history, that P Buchanan is a fascist just as Obama is.

Expose the fascists

He is strong nationalist. According to US govenment dictionary, this means you are a fascist. So, he is a fascist. To convince yourself of this please watch "McLaughlin Group" on PBS. No progressive person can watch this reactionary show for long, but to prove to yourself that he is a fascist, it is neccessary to do that.

Guest

Well I don't know if you're being facetious or not, but I will say that the vast majority of talking heads on all these tv "news" shows are CIA or other agency assets

jrs

He actually makes the best points on the show when I've watched it. I don't trust Buchanan, not so far as I can throw him and wouldn't vote for him. But the sorriness of what he's up against on that show, is such that he often comes across as the only sane one on it.

outsider

jrs, I voted for Buchanan twice when he ran for president. At least I believe he is an honest man (rare in politics) who is not afraid to tell the uncomfortable truth. He is a paleoconservative and a nationalist, which is anathema to the globalists who are destroying this country, as well as the world.

expose the fascists

I clearly said Buchanan is a “strong nationalist”. I also said US government view nationalism fascism. This view is associated with the globalist thinkers of the Evil Empire who are pushing for the “world government”. So, read first and then rate it.

Mikhael

What Pat Buchanan did does not justify that big eared boy owned by Wall Street's blood sacrificers declaring war for the tribes continued war profits. It doesn't justify him murdering by drone, children included. It doesn't justify him signing into law allowing armed drones in our skies. It doesn't justify him and the 90% of Congress Wall Street owns wasting perfectly good oxygen.

carroll price

Like most old line Conservatives, Buchanan is a hypocrite. He has proven time and again that he will jump in bed with neocons or liberals if he thinks doing so will prevent either group from banning him from their social circle by throwing him off their establishment supported talk shows.

ChemDawg

It is of course political wisdom to keep attacking the people who seem to be on your side. Does anyone notice how much you see on the internet of people who say they oppose the government policies, like yet another useless war, but who really spend their time attacking the other people who believe the same.

If we want change, then a good first step might be to stop shooting at the people who are on our side. Maybe we should concentrate on the people who order the deaths of people in illegal cruise missile strikes, or who spy unconstitutionally on Americans, or who promote these policies in the media, or who approve these policies in Congress and the Courts, or who get obscenely rich from these policies. Surely they are more deserving of criticism than Mr. Buchanan.

outsider

Carroll, name one time since the first gulf war that Buchanan has "jump(ed) in bed with neocons or liberals." He is one of McCain's most forceful critics, having called them 'McCainiacs' on several occasions. Several years ago he wrote a book, "Day of Reckoning," in which he skewered the GWB war loving neocons. Perhaps you should read it. I think Pat is too old to be worried about getting invited on talk shows or going to cocktail parties. MSNBC, his former employer, has blackballed him.

carroll price

The fact that Buchanan has so far failed to publicly acknowledge that 9/11 was a false flag attack, which anyone of even average intelligence knows to be true, puts him squarely in bed with neocons as well as most left-wing liberals like Noam Chomskey.

Guest again

PAT BUCHANAN: [Edward] Snowden broke his contract, he violated his oath, he betrayed American secrets and I think he damaged the security of the United States. I think he ought to be prosecuted.

. (McLaughlin Group, June 14, 2013)

Chef

OMG, you mean he doesn't agree with you on absolutely everything. Then he must therefore be awful.

Guest-iculation

Yeah, I simply do not trust someone who worked for Nixon and Reagan, and advocated for pardoning of the Iran Contra crew (TIA creators). I think his paleo stance was simply an opportunistic maneuver after his failed attempt to court the Christian Right in his theocratic-flavored presidential campaign, as witness by his reflexive statements regarding Snowden and Wikileaks (calling those involved in the latter "haters of America"). At heart he is an authoritarian.

Steve

Pat! Give your head a shake! Congress has been at it FOR YEARS, trying to arrange regime change in Syria. Whether it be the 'Syria Accountability Act'( though that might be the Senate's operation) or simply regurgitating Israeli Lobby anti-Syria propaganda, Congress is not going to turn down this chance when it's staring at them on the table…no chance…

Stop the war

To be a fascist or not, does not mean his message, opposition to Obama's war against Syria, should not be SUPPORTED. We strongly support Buchanan's opposition to the war. Down with evil empire and its supporters.

Guest Redux

Buchanan was ALL FOR the American empire when Nixon and Reagan were president. He was gung-ho about the Vietnam war for Christ's sake. He is not a good messenger to reach people who are on the fence.

Anyway the war WILL happen, and you can expect more in the future. Think petro-dollars and oil.

The world's resources are diminishing. More wars for oil and eventually for water are on the docket

outsider

Guest, quit living in the past. Buchanan changed his position over 20 years ago and has consistently been against US ME aggression. Therefore, he deserves our support even if he is wrong on the Snowden/NSA issue As for your last two paragraphs, you are right on.

Karl Marx

What also pretty obvious but not mentioned by Pat is that there is no draft and millions upon millions of Americans are either directly or indirectly employed by the military-security-industrial complex. What is the impact of this "war" on Americans? All of those employees are assured their jobs and only those who "volunteer" to join the military or become a mercenary are going to get killed and, if they do, who cares?

As Bush said, "war is good for business". So what if Bernanke has "buy" some more "Treasury" (what a misnomer) bonds? So what if the US debt is $34 trillion rather than $17 trillion?

The US is now the rogue nation that makes war on the rest of the world. This is obvious to everyone except public-schoo-brainwashed Americans. But if there is another 9/11, this time around, absolutely no one will be asking "why did they do this to us?" And if anyone is ignorant to ask that question, absolutely no one will be answering "because they hate our freedom and democracy." Even the most stupid know that there is no longer any freedom and democracy in the US.

Guest Redux

Karl, the American public by and large doesn't care at all and is incapable of even elementary logic (ie they are morons). And I can guarantee you that if there's another 9-11 (whether real or false-flag), the majority will not suddenly become reflective and ask how this could happen. They will howl for blood and for more "safety".

Karl Marx

So the US government "represents" what the average, as you put it, moron in the US truly wants. Therefore, the US is indeed The Borg and I guess we're all going to find out whether the US can conquer and control, either through proxies or by outright occupation, the entire world.

ML3

I hope if they start with Syria, they take the chance to punch Israel in the face. HARD. The terror N*zis will be bombing and killing civilians intentionally as they know they will escape any punishment for doing so. (Look how they even escape comparison; the word N*zi is no longer allowed on antiwar.com, even though it is an apt description as well as a timeworn historical term).
Here's a wish for Syria and her allies to immediately hit Israel repeatedly and with maximum effect when the terrorists with the US hardware come calling.

"Do we not want to know the truth?" Well, Mr. Buchanan hits several nails on the head with that one remark – for as the article itself asserts, and the comment just before mine illuminates, who really stands to gain by an attack like this? Who is egging us on the war against the entire middle east? In the words of a movie colonel, "you (the American people) can't handle the truth!"

Remember when this liar ran for office on the claim he was a Constitutional lawyer?

If you actually read history and the constitution, its clear that Congress was meant to be, and actually was, the powerful and governing arm of the government. Its supposed to be Congress, with our elected Representatives and Senators that makes the decisions. The 'Executive Branch' wasn't named that because Executives are akin to Gods. It was named the Executive Branch because it was there to 'execute' the decisions made by Congress.

And of course, the founders realized that the most important decision that a nation can make is the decision to go to war. So they clearly and explicitly gave that power only to the Congress.

If you're Congressional Representative and Senators aren't talking about impeaching Obama. And if they didn't also act to try to impeach Bush, then you need a new Representative and Senators. That's something you can do in a little over a years time.

outsider

Nice sentiment, GoneBabyGone. but your last paragraph shows naivete. Our basically one party rule is so entrenched that it makes little difference whether your rep has a D or R after his/her name. They are both from the Corporate War Party. It would be great to have a viable third party, but you can bet that the so-called red/blue divide will come together to stop this from happening.

Guest-iculation

Neither party is in the driver's seat. Which is why the NSA issue trumps every other.